Aguayo

ORDER REGARDING PROPER MEASURE OF RESTITUTION

Pending before the Court is the parties’ briefing on whether Plaintiffs can recover Defendant U.S. Bank’s profits stemming from the unlawfully obtained deficiency payments as restitution under the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq. The Court decides the matter on the papers submitted and without oral argument. See Civ. L.R. 7.1(d:l). For the reasons discussed below, *1076 the Court finds that Plaintiffs can recover such profits under the UCL [Doc.. 192],

I. ProCedural Background

On May 4, 2016, this Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment and found that U.S. Bank’s NOIs violated the Rees-Levering Act. (May Jh 2016 Order [Doc. 187] at 16.) Thereafter, the Court issued an order requiring the parties to propose dates for a pretrial conference. In response, U.S. Bank asserted that before the pretrial conference was held, the Court should determine whether under the UCL Plaintiffs are entitled to recover profits U.S. Bank earned from the deficiency payments collected from class members. (Def. ⅛ Submission Re, PTC [Doc. 189] 1:14-17.) According to U.S. Bank, Plaintiffs’ “theory is…